Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Balaji Motion Pictures Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2018) 191 TTJ 641 /61 ITR 421 / 162 DTR 105(Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty -Concealment – Bogus purchases- Levy of penalty was held to be not justified .

Ashraf Aziz Kasmani v. ITO (2018) 170 ITD 230/ 66 ITR 301 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 249 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Form of appeal and limitation – E-filing of appeal is not applicable to order passed prior to 1-3-2016 [ S.246A ]

Dy. CIT v. Central Bank of India (2018) 191 TTJ 265/ 161 DTR 1 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 234D: Interest on excess refund – No additional interest had been computed under S. 234D in the reassessment proceedings and therefore interest is chargeable.

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2018) 191 TTJ 393 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Issue was not examined during assessment hence reassessment was held to be valid. [ S.194H ]

Dy. CIT v. Central Bank of India (2018) 191 TTJ 265/ 161 DTR 1 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 115JA : Book profits – Not applicable to Banking company

Dy. CIT v. Calance Software (P) Ltd ( 2017) 82 taxmann.com 390/ . (2018) 191 TTJ 259 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer Pricing – Most appropriate method -Back to back transactions and solitary transaction-Matter restored to TPO .

Amit Parekh. v. ITO (2018) 170 ITD 213 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence – Mere availment of house building loan by assessee from bank for purchasing a new residential unit could not act as a disqualification for claim of exemption .[ S.45 ]

Jasvinder Hans. v. ACIT (2018) 170 ITD 241 / 164 DTR 249 (Asr) (Trib.)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Assessee could raise objection to valuation through his return of income, only in the assessment proceedings . No universal principle with regard to being heard in the matter can be laid down and it all depends upon the language of provision and object and purpose of it [ S.45 ]

Dy. CIT v. Central Bank of India (2018) 191 TTJ 265/ 161 DTR 1 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital gains –Business income- Sale of shares – Following the rule of consistency, the income from sale of shares is assessable as capital gains and not as business income. [ S.28(i) ]

ACIT v. Karuna Estates & Developers. (2018) 170 ITD 249 (Visakh) (Trib.)

S. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable –Firm -Partner- When partners of the firm contribute land as stock in trade though provision of S.45(3) would not be applicable , AO can examine reasonableness of payment to partners [ S.45(3) ]